Our friends at Kotaku UK explain why video games cost what they do, and investigate where that money actually goes.
This is an extremely pertinent question - and another one that’s really hard to answer because people will not let go of their data. The current video game charts, for instance, consist entirely of physical sales and are basically bullshit. Chris Dring, who edits UK trade publication MCV (which has been campaigning for months to get proper digital sales data out in the open), gave me an informed estimate.
“This is very hard to accurately quantify. According to IHS, digital console and PC games (this includes free-to-play and DLC, but excludes mobile) accounted for about £1,048bn last year. That, unfortunately, is just an estimate because there is no digital data available. The boxed games – based on GfK Chart-Track numbers – was £915m. So the split is about 54 per cent in favour of digital – but these are just estimates.”
How convenient... The only solid figures are of the more expensive physical market...
Also love how they merge figures when looking at this, because hey - consoles tend to rely more on physical still.
But when its more favourable to do the other they use the digital numbers.
TL;DR - Most companies will use the figures that are most favorable to their own image regardless of underlying facts.
They could market to make it more consumer friendly, but why would you. People will pay that extra cash so why should YOU diminish your profit margin?
They’d pay more if you upped the price. (*looking at you EA*)